On January 23, 2026, the HACC delivered its final ruling in the case of lawyer Mykola Toporkov, finding him legally insane and applying compulsory medical measures.  

Simultaneously, the court lifted asset freezes and was expected to resolve the issue of special confiscation of funds that had formed part of the bribe. Back in 2022, those funds were to be transferred for the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the basis of a relevant commander’s order. On that basis, the prosecution had then asked the court to lift the freeze. 

Such actions are regulated by a special law. In these cases, the state is required to compensate the value of such property after martial law is lifted. Moreover, in the ruling that lifted the asset freeze, the court expressly noted that if confiscation was not applied, the owner of the funds would be able to seek compensation.

Given the court’s finding that Toporkov committed an act bearing the elements of an offence under Article 369(4) of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, there were grounds to apply special confiscation despite his insanity. This is expressly provided for in Article 96-1(2)(3) of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. However, this was not reflected in the short-form text of the judgment, while the full text is classified. Тому є ймовірність, що суд має аргументовану позицію з цих питань. 

This means that after martial law is lifted, Toporkov or his legal representative may be able to claim compensation for these funds. Such an outcome is not aligned with standards of effective asset recovery for property used in the commission of corruption-related acts.  Such an outcome is not aligned with standards of effective asset recovery for property used in the commission of corruption-related acts.